The stated intention of pre-publication review is, "to protect the Faith against misrepresentation by its own followers at this early stage of its existence when comparatively few people have any knowledge of it", according to the Universal House of Justice, the governing body of the Baháʼís.
The review does not consider literary merit or its value as a publication, and is not required for doctoral theses[3] or informal online material, such as blogs.
This function should not be confused with evaluation of the literary merit of a work or of its value as a publication, which are normally the prerogative of the publisher...The purpose of review is to protect the Faith against misrepresentation by its own followers at this early stage of its existence when comparatively few people have any knowledge of it.
Because of these two things, and that the Baháʼí Faith can no longer be protected by obscurity, it becomes more important to present a correct view early on.
The change implied by this new stage in its evolution is that whereas heretofore this tender plant was protected in its obscurity from the attention of external elements, it has now become exposed.
So, far from adopting a carefree attitude, the community must be conscious of the necessity to present a correct view of itself and an accurate understanding of its purpose to a largely skeptical public.
The tendency is to describe alternative versions as 'distortions' or 'doubtful judgements' which have to be 'corrected' by reference to a body of 'facts' contained in the standard histories... the Baha'i authorities are eager to promote only a limited type of scholarship that accepts for its basic premise the underlying validity of divine revelation as expressed in the Baha'i scriptures... Those responsible for carrying out the review of publishable material are not normally trained academics, but are usually drawn from the ranks of `knowledgeable' and experienced Baha'is deemed capable of ensuring that a given text conform to accepted standards in terms of both style and content.
Then MacEoin has quoted selectively from Shoghi Effendi and the Universal House of Justice to make the Baha’i Faith appear intolerant and antiintellectual.
[16]Barney Leith wrote in 1995: "I submit that it is no longer possible or right for National Assemblies to try to control the kinds of things Bahá'ís publish about their Faith.
[6]Margit Warburg, a sociologist who published a detailed study of the religion in 2006, wrote: To the extent that I can judge it, the review policy does not in general seem to be much of a hindrance to serious research by most Baha’i authors.
[18]Mikhail Sergeev, in his book, Theory of Religious Cycles: Tradition, Modernity, and the Bahá'í Faith (2015) wrote: Since, on the one hand, the essential features of the Bahá'í Administrative Order cannot be altered and, on the other, opposition can never be completely eliminated, those restrictions, as temporary as they may appear, will in fact remain permanent while taking various forms and shapes, including the review policy, the monitoring of the Internet, the protection of Faith by the Auxiliary Boards members and Counselors, and so on.